3 ms·

It was always a false dichotomy. The core issue was America needing better and more accountable policing. "Defunding" the police was an extremist, fringe posi

It was always a false dichotomy. The core issue was America needing better and more accountable policing. "Defunding" the police was an extremist, fringe position that hijacked the situation.

krapp 2y ago
No one would even be talking about "needing better and more accountable policing" if "defund the police" as a position didn't shock people who have no reason to fear the police into realizing how dire the situation was for those who do. The "hijack" is walking back a revolutionary ideal to something palatable for the mainstream that doesn't threaten the status quo. It isn't a false dichotomy, but simply a difference in interpreting what the core issue is. Some believe the police can't be reformed and can't be held accountable, because the core issue is systemic racism and white supremacy, and the only option is to tear the entire system down and rebuild it from scratch around truly anti-racist principles. Obviously if you don't accept the thesis, you can't accept the conclusion.
pavel_lishin 2y ago
> "Defunding" the police was an extremist, fringe position that hijacked the situation. I think it sounded extremist and fringe, if you assumed it meant completely gutting their budget and placing police officers on a trebuchet aimed at the nearest shoreline. But the actual "Defund the Police" proposal tried to shift some of that funding to non-armed responders, to better community services, and other things that have been proven to work better at improving outcomes and preventing crimes than a man with a gun showing up to deal with every conceivable scenario that someone found unpleasant.
- seoulmetro 2y ago
  This is the "it was only a prank bro" excuse for the idea of "defund the police". No, defund the police means defund the police... not defund some subsection of policing to fund another new section of policing. "Defund the police" is as hilarious as it is backwards as a statement.
  - pavel_lishin 2y ago
    You're allowed to have your own mental idea of what a slogan represents, even if it doesn't match the varied and complicated reality of multiple people attempting to fix a wrong.
    - seoulmetro 2y ago
      Sure. And the slogan "Trix are for kids" means it's made specifically for adults.
      - pavel_lishin 2y ago
        That actually feels like a great example, because adults are, in fact, allowed to eat Trix.
        seoulmetro 2y ago
        I don't think you understand what slogans are for or what "something for X" means.
- baggy_trough 2y ago
  Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police NYT, June 12, 2020 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol...
  - hashiyakshmi 2y ago
    Do you actually believe this NYT opinion article speaks for everybody on this topic or is that just convenient to the argument you're trying to make right now?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - pavel_lishin 2y ago
      It reminds me of CX debate in high school. It was a pretty formalized thing, and to "defeat" an argument the other team had, all you had to do was come up with some citation to refute it. Barely mattered what it was, it just had to be Good Enough for a judge (sometimes another high school kid who was grabbed out of the hall) to accept.
pnathan 2y ago
no proposal any political side wants will get anywhere without accountable police. less beating of black men? accountability. more convictions of thieves? accountability. more presence in disorderly areas? accountability. equality before the law? accountability. Pick anything you want, any political position, and if the cops are unaccountable, its a dead letter. Except for one: no more cops. "defunding" is, perhaps, the worst political slogan I've heard of in my _life_, as it implies yeeting the cops out of the city, with prejudice. Most people didn't want that. (Some did). So that was a cluster. I think that all Americans need to step out of their houses and shake hands with their neighbors, look around, and realize we live next to each other, all of us. And we have to make this a society we can all live in, rather than griping online.

It was always a false dichotomy. The core issue was America needing better and more accountable policing. "Defunding" the police was an extremist, fringe position that hijacked the situation.

krapp 2y ago

No one would even be talking about "needing better and more accountable policing" if "defund the police" as a position didn't shock people who have no reason to fear the police into realizing how dire the situation was for those who do. The "hijack" is walking back a revolutionary ideal to something palatable for the mainstream that doesn't threaten the status quo. It isn't a false dichotomy, but simply a difference in interpreting what the core issue is. Some believe the police can't be reformed and can't be held accountable, because the core issue is systemic racism and white supremacy, and the only option is to tear the entire system down and rebuild it from scratch around truly anti-racist principles. Obviously if you don't accept the thesis, you can't accept the conclusion.

pavel_lishin 2y ago

> "Defunding" the police was an extremist, fringe position that hijacked the situation. I think it sounded extremist and fringe, if you assumed it meant completely gutting their budget and placing police officers on a trebuchet aimed at the nearest shoreline. But the actual "Defund the Police" proposal tried to shift some of that funding to non-armed responders, to better community services, and other things that have been proven to work better at improving outcomes and preventing crimes than a man with a gun showing up to deal with every conceivable scenario that someone found unpleasant.

seoulmetro 2y ago
This is the "it was only a prank bro" excuse for the idea of "defund the police". No, defund the police means defund the police... not defund some subsection of policing to fund another new section of policing. "Defund the police" is as hilarious as it is backwards as a statement.
- pavel_lishin 2y ago
  You're allowed to have your own mental idea of what a slogan represents, even if it doesn't match the varied and complicated reality of multiple people attempting to fix a wrong.
  - seoulmetro 2y ago
    Sure. And the slogan "Trix are for kids" means it's made specifically for adults.
    - pavel_lishin 2y ago
      That actually feels like a great example, because adults are, in fact, allowed to eat Trix.
      - seoulmetro 2y ago
        I don't think you understand what slogans are for or what "something for X" means.
baggy_trough 2y ago
Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police NYT, June 12, 2020 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol...
- hashiyakshmi 2y ago
  Do you actually believe this NYT opinion article speaks for everybody on this topic or is that just convenient to the argument you're trying to make right now?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - pavel_lishin 2y ago
    It reminds me of CX debate in high school. It was a pretty formalized thing, and to "defeat" an argument the other team had, all you had to do was come up with some citation to refute it. Barely mattered what it was, it just had to be Good Enough for a judge (sometimes another high school kid who was grabbed out of the hall) to accept.

pnathan 2y ago

no proposal any political side wants will get anywhere without accountable police. less beating of black men? accountability. more convictions of thieves? accountability. more presence in disorderly areas? accountability. equality before the law? accountability. Pick anything you want, any political position, and if the cops are unaccountable, its a dead letter. Except for one: no more cops. "defunding" is, perhaps, the worst political slogan I've heard of in my _life_, as it implies yeeting the cops out of the city, with prejudice. Most people didn't want that. (Some did). So that was a cluster. I think that all Americans need to step out of their houses and shake hands with their neighbors, look around, and realize we live next to each other, all of us. And we have to make this a society we can all live in, rather than griping online.